Just How Important Are WRs?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Just How Important Are WRs?

         Apparently, not very. Here are some cold, hard football facts to back that opinion up...in this excellent article:  http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_5350_Gluttony%3A_the_wide_receiver_feeding_frenzy.html
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from quinzpatsfan. Show quinzpatsfan's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    Texas that article is a little misleading, it's saying that you don't need a "superstar" WR not that the WR position isn't important.  It makes sense usually when you have one super elite WR who is 33% of your entire passing offense 50% or more of your WR yards your team becomes one dimesional and usually a good def (like the kind you see in the playoffs) can shut down your one WR.  I feel like that's what happen to us in the playoffs with Moss.  Brady became moss dependent to a degree and NYG shut him down. 

    If you look at some of the past SB winners though, most had really good WR corps though, GB, NO, Indy, even NE and pitt have a good group of WR if no one superstar.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    So... the premise is HoF QB's win championships and WR's are just cogs. Hrm.... I think that's pretty common knowledge.

    If you really think about it, the best WR's are on teams that are in the bottom 15 of the league generally. This is because of where they draft but it's also a function that they have really poor QB's who get paid next to nothing. As the article suggests WR are flashy hood ornaments they draw peoples attention. The weaker teams need those hood ornaments to keep fans happy, so they overspend in FA to ensure ticket sales (no big shocker there). Teams with top end QB's tend to spend an excess amount of money on those QB's to retain them. So, there is less money to go around. Those teams are forced to either spread the remaining wealth around or to give up on other aspects of the game to enhance others. It's no surprise that they typically go after more cost effective options in light of the cost of expensive hood ornaments. The better the QB the better they make WR's look (hence why we see many fail when they leave a HoF QB for a poor team).

    However, and this is a big however, if you can somehow match a HoF QB with a top end WR it can drastically change the outcomes of games. It's just rarer to see that happen because of cap management concerns. So, it shouldn't be based on the importance or WR's, because the difference between a poor WR core (see the 06' Pats O), and a great WR core (see 07' Pats O) can be massive. And before you mention that the 06' Pats made it to the AFCCG and the 07' Pats lost the SB I'd just like to point out that the 06' Pats D was the driving force through the majority of their games and in 07' the Pats O was the driving force for the majority of the games. I think this article would have been better suited comparing a elite QB with a poor WR group to a elite WR group with a poor QB
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    A guy who touches the ball four or five times per game can only have so much impact, no matter how good he is at “stretching the field.” Quite frankly, a wide receiver who "stretches the field" is no substitute for a Hall of Fame quarterback who "makes good decisions" or, you know, "throws accurate passes."

    All the more reason I have been saying we didn't need a Mike Wallace/Vincent Jackson type. We have a ball control offense that makes high % throws and needs to run the ball and keep a defense honest.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    In Response to Re: Just How Important Are WRs?:
    [QUOTE]Texas that article is a little misleading, it's saying that you don't need a "superstar" WR not that the WR position isn't important.  It makes sense usually when you have one super elite WR who is 33% of your entire passing offense 50% or more of your WR yards your team becomes one dimesional and usually a good def (like the kind you see in the playoffs) can shut down your one WR.  I feel like that's what happen to us in the playoffs with Moss.  Brady became moss dependent to a degree and NYG shut him down.  If you look at some of the past SB winners though, most had really good WR corps though, GB, NO, Indy, even NE and pitt have a good group of WR if no one superstar.
    Posted by quinzpatsfan[/QUOTE]

    Exactly. 

    I would add ...

    How many teams have won Superbowls with RBs who gained something analagous to that much, like 1500+?

    Ladanian? Nope. Chris Johnson? Nope. Steve Jackson? Nope. In fact, every single one of the teams to win and go to a Superbowl the last five seasons used platoon RBs, IIRC. Sack leading defenders, InT leading corners, etc. Anyone who isn't a QB can fall into this kind of "hood ornament" area, where they are overpaid. 

    So 11 teams have won a superbowl without a 1000 yard reciever since 1978 
    (about 30%)... I bet almost all of those 11 had a guy with around 900, or they were the Bears or Ravens and had such somethering defense that it made up for one-dimensional/bad offense. 

    Yet still, getting a good RB is crucially important. As is having talent at WR. 

    That article needs to be framed in such a way that it is not overstating it's case, which right now is waaaay overstated. 

    In short, you spend the biggest bucks on a QB, and pick your spots around that. Unless NE goes overboard for Welker (I'd let him walk before that myself) they've done a good job trying to get at least "good" talent at various roster spots without splashing on "hood ornament" players at any position. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    The more I think about it I would call WR's more like wheels then I would hood ornaments. You can get a cheap set of 4 wheels (not tires) that are dented, rusting, and cracked. You might drive alright for a little while but sooner or later they will break and your car won't go anywhere. The flashy V Jax, Cal Johnson, Fitz's are the chrome 18" spinners. They catch your eye driving down the street but, at least where I am, they are on rust buckets and some of the worst cars on the road. Those wheels are so expensive you can't spend the money upgrading or doing work under the hood. What you need is 4 good realiable wheels that don't have any dents or issues. They might be a bit scratched or just plain flat grey but they let you spend money on the other parts of the car and they won't cause you issues
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    In Response to Re: Just How Important Are WRs?:
    [QUOTE]Texas that article is a little misleading, it's saying that you don't need a "superstar" WR not that the WR position isn't important.  It makes sense usually when you have one super elite WR who is 33% of your entire passing offense 50% or more of your WR yards your team becomes one dimesional and usually a good def (like the kind you see in the playoffs) can shut down your one WR.  I feel like that's what happen to us in the playoffs with Moss.  Brady became moss dependent to a degree and NYG shut him down.

    RESPONSE: I disagree. The Pats lost SB 42 to the G-men primarily because the Pats' OL could not adequately protect Tom Brady.

      If you look at some of the past SB winners though, most had really good WR corps though, GB, NO, Indy, even NE and pitt have a good group of WR if no one superstar.

    RESPONSE: Where the article could be misleading is that it doesn't segregate its stats to before and after the enactment and/or enforcement of the Polian passing rules, in 2004. Thereafter, QBs can't barely be hit, and can throw the ball away to avoid sacks...and WRs can no longer to be touched, once they get 5 yards past the line of scrimmage. This has made good WRs and, especially deep threats, more valuable. 
    Posted by quinzpatsfan[/QUOTE]
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    You build your team from the inside out, skill players like WR or RB can be found everywhere but without the guys up front to block or tackle them you'll go nowhere fast.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Runer. Show Runer's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    In Response to Just How Important Are WRs?:
    [QUOTE]     Apparently, not very. Here are some cold, hard football facts to back that opinion up...in this excellent article:   http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_5350_Gluttony%3A_the_wide_receiver_feeding_frenzy.html
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    How about this cold hard fact.... if welker caught the ball brady threw to him for the first down.... the Patriots might very well be Super Bowl champions.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from quinzpatsfan. Show quinzpatsfan's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    In Response to Re: Just How Important Are WRs?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Just How Important Are WRs? :
    Posted by TexasPat3[/QUOTE]

    Texas, I agree pats lost to Giants primarly from overwhemly pass rush, that in itself is in a way shuting down the Pats best weapon because the pats relied so much on Moss the gmen could gamble more and get after brady because they knew Moss needed TIME to get down the field.  Either way that wasn't the premise of my arguement.  I do think that whether misleading or not the article is NOT saying the WR postion is not important just have a superstar at the postion very well may be.  Which I agree on, it's similiar to other positions other than QB, you need a well rounded group, or at least in my opinion a well rounded group is much harder to defend that one absolute superstar.  
      
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from FishTaco64. Show FishTaco64's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    Ask Tom Brady right after that ball bounced off Reche Caldwell's hands.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from NCPatsFan1971. Show NCPatsFan1971's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    In Response to Re: Just How Important Are WRs?:
    [QUOTE]The more I think about it I would call WR's more like wheels then I would hood ornaments. You can get a cheap set of 4 wheels (not tires) that are dented, rusting, and cracked. You might drive alright for a little while but sooner or later they will break and your car won't go anywhere. The flashy V Jax, Cal Johnson, Fitz's are the chrome 18" spinners. They catch your eye driving down the street but, at least where I am, they are on rust buckets and some of the worst cars on the road. Those wheels are so expensive you can't spend the money upgrading or doing work under the hood. What you need is 4 good realiable wheels that don't have any dents or issues. They might be a bit scratched or just plain flat grey but they let you spend money on the other parts of the car and they won't cause you issues
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]


    Excellent analogy PatsEng.

    A perfect example of Chrome 18" - 20" Chrome Spinners on a rusty old car was the Matt Millen years at Detroit where almost every year the Lions would finish in the Toilet and then Draft another great "Chrome Spinner" receiver.  

    BTW, I laugh everytime I see $4,000 worth of Rims on a $500 Car.  And to make matters worse some of these guys actually lease these Spinners.   :) 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    In Response to Re: Just How Important Are WRs?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Just How Important Are WRs? : How about this cold hard fact.... if welker caught the ball brady threw to him for the first down.... the Patriots might very well be Super Bowl champions.
    Posted by Runer[/QUOTE]

         True that...LOL!!!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Runer. Show Runer's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    Seriously, it is not just WR... think about clutch plays.... in 07 Tyree made a clutch play on a bad pass he shouldn't have made but HAD to make to be a champion.... Samuel dropped a clutch int on a bad pass he should have easily made that would have made him a champion. Result? Giants beat us. tyree is a champ, samuel is a chump.

    Fast forward to 2012.... Welker drops a clutch bad pass that he HAD to make to be a champion.Mario manningham makes his clutch play. Result? Giants beat is again. Manningham is champ, Welker is a chump.

    WR and CB are to very overlooked positions that are extremely important and while the team may get you to the big show, some individual clutch plays are what wins it.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from auchhhhhhhhhhh. Show auchhhhhhhhhhh's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    Nice Read !!! i Agree, NE only need Depth at WR 4 or 5 guys who can run the routes and catch the ball on a regular basis.

    Welker, Gronk, Hernandez, Lloyd, + 2 average pass catchers can make this team GREAT !!!!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Just How Important Are WRs?

    if tha majority of a teams plays are pass....yeah, you'd better have some WRs and TEs who can catch.  Was that a trick question?
     

Share